Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T08:22:55.300Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Timing of Glyphosate Application on Control of Silverleaf Nightshade and Glyphosate-Resistant Cotton Yield

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Manilal Choudhary  and
David G. Bordovsky
Manilal Choudhary*
Affiliation:
Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, Agricultural Quarantine Inspection, P.O. Box 66192, Chicago, IL 60666
David G. Bordovsky
Affiliation:
Vernon Agricultural Research and Extension Center, The Texas A&M University System, P.O. Box 1658, 11708 Highway 70 South, Vernon, TX 76385-1658
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A 3-yr dryland study was initiated in 1999 at Munday, TX, on an Altus fine sandy loam to determine the most appropriate cotton growth stage or stages at which to apply glyphosate. The objectives were: (1) to evaluate control of silverleaf nightshade in the cotton and (2) to determine the effect on yield. Treatments were: (1) control (C; two cultivations), (2) early glyphosate at the four-leaf stage (E), (3) early glyphosate followed by a midseason application 21 d later (E+M), (4) two cultivations plus late glyphosate at 20% open bolls (L), (5) treatment E+L, and (6) treatment E+M+L. In fall 1999 and 2001, silverleaf nightshade stem numbers decreased in the plots sprayed early and midseason, and increased in plots receiving only late or no applications when compared with the counts in the spring of those years. However, in fall 2000, nightshade numbers were less than in early spring 2000 regardless of treatment, probably because of hot and dry weather. In fall 2001, silverleaf nightshade populations had increased 13-fold and twofold for the C and L treatments, respectively, when compared with populations at the beginning of the study. Other treatments had population decreases of 10 to 90%. Three-year average lint yields were higher with early or early plus midseason applications. Lint yields were similar with early or early plus midseason sprays. Lint yields were higher when nightshade/cotton biomass competition was lower. Early application of glyphosate can effectively control silverleaf nightshade populations and can increase yield when compared to no application or a late application.

Keywords

Glyphosatetrifluralinsilverleaf nightshade, Solanum elaeagnifolium Cavglyphosate-resistant cotton, Gossypium hirsutum L.Silverleaf nightshadeglyphosateglyphosate-resistant cottonlint yieldweed control
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , March 2006 , pp. 198 - 203
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Abernathy, J. R. 1975. New Weed Problems for High Plains Cotton. Proceedings of the Western Cotton Producers conference. 71 p.Google Scholar
Abernathy, J. R. 1984. Silverleaf Nightshade and Nutsedge in Cotton Losses and Control. Proceedings of the Western Cotton Producers conference. Pp. 6–7.Google Scholar
Abernathy, J. R. and Keeling, J. W. 1979. Silverleaf nightshade control in cotton with glyphosate. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 32:380.Google Scholar
Boyd, J. W. and Murray, D. S. 1982. Effects of shade on silverleaf nightshade (Solanum elaeagnifolium). Weed Sci. 30:264–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, J. W., Murray, D. S., and Tyrl, R. J. 1984. Silverleaf nightshade, Solanum elaeagnifolium, origin, distribution, and relation to man. Ecol. Bot. 38:210–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooley, A. W. and Smith, D. T. 1973. Silverleaf nightshade (white weed) establishment from seed and clipped seedlings. in Weed and Herbicide Research in West Texas. Texas Agricultural Experimental Progress Report PR-3198. Pp. 6–9.Google Scholar
Cuthberston, E. G., Leys, A. R., and McMaster, G. 1976. Silverleaf nightshade—a potential threat to agriculture. Agric. Gaz. (New South Wales) 87:11–13.Google Scholar
Davis, C. H., Smith, J. J., and Hawkins, R. S. 1945. Eradication of the White Horsenettle in Southern Arizona. Arizona Agricultural Experimental Station Bulletin No. 195. Pp. 14.Google Scholar
Dotray, P. A. and Keeling, J. W. 1996. Silverleaf nightshade (Solanum Elaeagnifolium) control with glyphosate at reduced rates. Texas J. Agric. Nat. Res. 9:33–41.Google Scholar
Green, J. D., Murray, D. S., and Stone, J. F. 1988. Soil water relations of silverleaf nightshade (Solanum elaeagnifolium Cav.) with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 36:740–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, J. D., Murray, D. S., and Verhalen, L. M. 1987. Full-season weed interference of silverleaf nightshade (Solanum elaeagnifolium Cav.) with cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Sci. 35:813–818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keeling, J. W. and Abernathy, J. R. 1980. Rope application of herbicide to perennial weeds. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 33:357.Google Scholar
Roche, C. 1991. Silverleaf Nightshade. PNW-Pacific Northwest Extension Publication No. 365, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho State Universities, Cooperative Extension Service. 2 p.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1989. The SAS System for Windows. Version 4.0.1111. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute.Google Scholar
Smith, B. S., Pawlak, J. A., Murray, D. S., Verhalen, L. M., and Green, J. D. 1990. Interference from established stands of Silverleaf Nightshade (Solanum elaeagnifolium) on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) lint yield. Weed Sci. 38:129–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, D. T. and Wiese, A. F. 1973. Crop losses from several annual and perennial weeds. Abstr. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. 3:53–55.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service. 1979. Soil Survey of Knox County, TX. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, College Station, TX.Google Scholar